Literature DB >> 26874537

Grading of Prostate Cancer: Past, Present, and Future.

Andres Matoso1, Jonathan I Epstein2.   

Abstract

The grading of prostate cancer has undergone significant changes since the adoption of the Gleason grading system in the 1970s. Gleason patterns 1 and 2 are no longer in use and the current Gleason score 6 of 10 is the lowest grade possible. Several specific morphologies that were historically considered Gleason grade 3 are currently assigned a Gleason pattern 4. Consequently, current Gleason score 6 cancers have a better prognosis than historic ones. There is now ample literature that supports that Gleason score 7 includes patients with very different prognosis; those with Gleason score 3 + 4 have a much better prognosis than patients with Gleason score 4 + 3. Within patients with high-grade cancer, it is now also clear that patients with Gleason score 8 have a significantly better prognosis than men with Gleason scores 9-10. Additionally, more recent studies have demonstrated that there is no significant difference in the prognosis of patients with Gleason score 9 or 10, making the distinction between the two pointless. A new contemporary grading system has been proposed that addresses these changes/problems and provides a simpler system with only five grades that reflect more accurately the prognosis of each group. We review the different changes applied to the Gleason scoring system since its conception as well as the studies leading to a new contemporary grading system.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gleason grading system; Prostate cancer; Urology

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26874537     DOI: 10.1007/s11934-016-0576-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Urol Rep        ISSN: 1527-2737            Impact factor:   3.092


  36 in total

1.  The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason patterns of higher grade in radical prostatectomy specimens: a proposal to modify the Gleason grading system.

Authors:  C C Pan; S R Potter; A W Partin; J I Epstein
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 6.394

2.  Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate without invasive carcinoma on needle biopsy: emphasis on radical prostatectomy findings.

Authors:  Brian D Robinson; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-08-17       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Prognostic impact of intraductal carcinoma and large cribriform carcinoma architecture after prostatectomy in a contemporary cohort.

Authors:  Dominique Trudel; Michelle R Downes; Jenna Sykes; Ken J Kron; John Trachtenberg; Theodorus H van der Kwast
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 9.162

4.  Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging.

Authors:  D F Gleason; G T Mellinger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Survival rates of patients with prostatic cancer, tumor stage, and differentiation--preliminary report.

Authors:  J C Bailar; G T Mellinger; D F Gleason
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Rep       Date:  1966-03

6.  The association of the cribriform pattern with outcome for prostatic adenocarcinomas.

Authors:  G Kir; B C Sarbay; E Gümüş; C S Topal
Journal:  Pathol Res Pract       Date:  2014-06-19       Impact factor: 3.250

7.  Prostate Biopsy Specimens With Gleason 3+3=6 and Intraductal Carcinoma: Radical Prostatectomy Findings and Clinical Outcomes.

Authors:  Francesca Khani; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 6.394

8.  Histological grade heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer. Biological and clinical implications.

Authors:  E T Ruijter; C A van de Kaa; J A Schalken; F M Debruyne; D J Ruiter
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 7.996

Review 9.  The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System.

Authors:  Jonathan I Epstein; Lars Egevad; Mahul B Amin; Brett Delahunt; John R Srigley; Peter A Humphrey
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 6.394

10.  Prognosis of mucinous adenocarcinoma of the prostate treated by radical prostatectomy: a study of 47 cases.

Authors:  Adeboye O Osunkoya; Matthew E Nielsen; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 6.394

View more
  9 in total

1.  Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) Diffusion Weighted Imaging (DWI) in the Periferic Prostate Cancer Detection and Stratification.

Authors:  Filippo Pesapane; Francesca Patella; Enrico Maria Fumarola; Silvia Panella; Anna Maria Ierardi; Giovanni Guido Pompili; Giuseppe Franceschelli; Salvatore Alessio Angileri; Alberto Magenta Biasina; Gianpaolo Carrafiello
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 3.064

2.  BoxCar and shotgun proteomic analyses reveal molecular networks regulated by UBR5 in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Yiwu Yan; Bo Zhou; Yeon-Joo Lee; Sungyong You; Michael R Freeman; Wei Yang
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 3.984

Review 3.  Cribriform Patterned Lesions in the Prostate Gland with Emphasis on Differential Diagnosis and Clinical Significance.

Authors:  Maria Destouni; Andreas C Lazaris; Vasiliki Tzelepi
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-21       Impact factor: 6.575

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy combined with systematic 12-core ultrasound-guided biopsy improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: Are we ready to abandon the systematic approach?

Authors:  Christopher Antonio Febres-Aldana; Sarah Alghamdi; Thomas A Weppelmann; Emilio Lastarria; Akshay Bhandari; Yumna Omarzai; Robert J Poppiti
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2020-10-15

5.  Recurrence analysis on prostate cancer patients with Gleason score 7 using integrated histopathology whole-slide images and genomic data through deep neural networks.

Authors:  Jian Ren; Kubra Karagoz; Michael L Gatza; Eric A Singer; Evita Sadimin; David J Foran; Xin Qi
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-11-15

6.  Quantitative proteomic analysis of prostate tissue specimens identifies deregulated protein complexes in primary prostate cancer.

Authors:  Bo Zhou; Yiwu Yan; Yang Wang; Sungyong You; Michael R Freeman; Wei Yang
Journal:  Clin Proteomics       Date:  2019-04-13       Impact factor: 3.988

Review 7.  Prostatic Adenocarcinoma: A Grading from Gleason to the New Grade-Group System: A Historical and Critical Review

Authors:  Muhammad Abrar Barakzai
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2019-03-26

Review 8.  Clinical significance of subtypes of Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer.

Authors:  Oudai Hassan; Andres Matoso
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-09

9.  Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma.

Authors:  Vishal Rao; Gowri Garudadri; Arya Sahithi Shilpa; Daphne Fonseca; S Murthy Sudha; Rakesh Sharma; T Rao Subramanyeshwar; Sundaram Challa
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2018 Jul-Sep
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.